Do the Pros care what name is on the head stock?

Great points.

My two cents...

If you're shopping for a band to join, they may ask what kind of gear you have. What they're really asking is what kind of commitment you have to music - if you have brand name gear, you've made an investment in yourself as a musician. If you only have cheapo instruments, they'll assume you're not serious.<...>

I suppose that's a valid point, but I've been in bands since the 1960s, have never been asked what kind of gear I play and have never asked someone else as a condition of consideration for employment.

With gear there is a point of diminishing returns. In other words, each time the price goes up an equal amount as the last raise, the improvement gets less and less.

So keeping that in mind, you can have that cheap <$100 strat copy, and more than likely the pickups are going to be el-cheapo and it isn't going to sound great. But you can always change the pickups IF you like the body.

Then as you go up in price points, you are likely to get to that point of diminishing returns. Is that ES-330 really worth almost six Epiphone Casinos? I'm not making the judgement because for each of us the answer is different. I have both a Casino and an ES-330 and if I bring one to the gig, it will be the Casino. I have aftermarket pickups on it and it sounds better because of that.

And as Note Boat pointed out with the lady with the Squier Strat example, it isn't so much what you have, but what you do with it. Too many players place too much emphasis on the name. And also as Note Boat pointed out, some of them might not hire you with that Epiphone - if you are a great player, you both can lose by that decision.

So I guess the answer is, some pros do care about the name, and others do not. I've been in the music biz for decades and I've seen both.

For me here is what I care about when auditioning a musician to be in my band (in order):

Being a professional musician is a lot more than what kind of gear you have. As long as the gear is appropriate, it's OK as far as I'm concerned. I saw Jimi Page play an el-cheapo, "beaverboard" built Danelectro and he sounded better than most guitarists I've ever heard (including myself).

Notes, I think it's a generational and/or experience thing. The guys* who ask what gear I've got tend to be 20s/early 30s. If they're 40s or older, the bandleaders tend to ask if I read music instead.

In retrospect, that makes some sense... because of the experiences they've probably had. Young guys have usually played mostly with other young guys - the ones with decent chops who haven't made a gear investment are probably a lot more rare than the guys with cheap gear and no chops. So it's a time management thing - they might audition 3-5 guys with good gear to find one that fits, but they'd have to go through 10 or more playing Kays or Squiers.

Once they get some time under their belts, it's still a time management thing, but from a different perspective, and also from the experiences they've had. They've learned that players who read learn the tunes faster, and are 'gig ready' a lot quicker. If somebody asks if I read and I tell them I sight read - and I can do it in any clef (even alto), I've never had a follow-up question about my gear. I actually have had a band leader give me a bass clef reading test, just to see if I was yanking his chain, but nobody has whipped out a viola part for me to play yet.

FWIW, the folks who put emphasis on gear tend to lead bands somewhat lower on the pay scale. They might lead bands where each player makes $100 a night; the guys who ask about reading first can sometimes double that or better. I've never had a bandleader ask if I could read for a gig that didn't pay reasonably well.

*my use of "guys" isn't intended to be sexist here - I've met a lot of fine female players, but none in the auditioning bandleader role.

In an ideal world, every bandleader would be as wise and enlightened as Notes.

I'm guessing that the pro-gear question is easier for those of us who primarily play bass, because there are about 1,000 guitar players out there for every capable and available bassist. Ads for bass players seem less often to demand "pro gear" than ads for guitarists. If I answered an ad for a "pro gear" guitar player & told them I played a Kalamazoo solid-body into a 1942 National amp with no effects, I am confident they would hang up on me. (Am I wrong? I don't think so.) If they heard me play through my rig, however, it might be a different story, depending on the band.

Notes, I think it's a generational and/or experience thing. The guys* who ask what gear I've got tend to be 20s/early 30s. If they're 40s or older, the bandleaders tend to ask if I read music instead.

You could be right. When I started playing, it didn't matter what kind of a guitar you played, It could be a Danelectro, Silvertone, or whatever. Later on those weird (to me) European guitars came around, I particularly liked the flashy Italian jobs and the look of the teardrop shaped Vox myself. Now it seems Gibson and Fender dominate even though there are plenty of other fine guitars out there.

To me it's not what you play, but what you are playing.
<...>Once they get some time under their belts, it's still a time management thing, but from a different perspective, and also from the experiences they've had. They've learned that players who read learn the tunes faster, and are 'gig ready' a lot quicker. If somebody asks if I read and I tell them I sight read - and I can do it in any clef (even alto), I've never had a follow-up question about my gear. I actually have had a band leader give me a bass clef reading test, just to see if I was yanking his chain, but nobody has whipped out a viola part for me to play yet.

I call everything but the Treble or Bass clef "Trouble Clefs" ;)

And yes, I prefer musicians who can read music, even if none is necessary for the music we are playing. People who read music generally speak the same language and can communicate with each other more efficiently and precisely. Not that I would make reading music a sticking point on an audition.
In an ideal world, every bandleader would be as wise and enlightened as Notes.

Thanks. I remember a story I read about Count Basie. It was said that he would pick a lesser player at an audition if the lesser player had a better attitude. And the Basie Band always sounded great and played with much enthusiasm.
I'm guessing that the pro-gear question is easier for those of us who primarily play bass, because there are about 1,000 guitar players out there for every capable and available bassist.

Back in the psychedelic days, when nobody wanted to hire a sax player, I played bass for a while (I'm a survivor). Previous to that I had experience doubling on bass for years in bigger bands. I knew or could find most of the notes on the fretboard, have a good set of ears, and can learn the bass part to any pop song of the day. Plus with the music theory in my head, I could stretch out a little too. So I bought a beat up, pawn shop, imitation Jazz bass (still have it) and a beat up Ampeg amp that was loud enough and I was working. I must admit that I enjoyed playing bass a lot.

Notes

...I prefer musicians who can read music, even if none is necessary for the music we are playing. People who read music generally speak the same language and can communicate with each other more efficiently and precisely.

That's my preference as well, and for the same reasons. Presently I'm playing with two pros who have great reading skills, and it's a joy -- my first experience with pros since conservatory. Even with readers however you face the possibility of a competent player who doesn't know that Bb is part of a Gm7 chord. This can be distressing, but it's part of the realities of band life: Communication breakdowns are going to happen.

If I were shopping for bandmates, I wouldn't ask TOO much about equipment. ("Can you be heard over drums in a 200-seat hall?" That's about it.) Even so, I acknowledge the dominant paradigm in which appearance counts more than substance. To be taken seriously as a session player, for example, one couldn't get away with something like my primitive/minimalist rig. If someone asked me to play like Dimebag Darrell through my kit, I would be out of luck and out of a job. That is real life, Notes. I don't like it, but them's the facts.

Wow! Interesting stuff. These things wouldn't so much enter my mind but I play music for fun as a hobby not as a profession so that is a big difference. There is that "You might be a guitar player if" thing that says "The gear in your trunk is worth more than your car". Do my son and I read? Very poorly. Pro gear? Sort of. We got cheap stuff we love and play as well. My son has about $1400 in his bass rig and that doesn't include the bass guitar. He makes $10/hr. I'd say that indicates commitment. My guitar rig? Amp cab and pedals cost me about the same as his, yet if I was truely serious about being a gigging musician I could afford much better. If someone has borderline equipment but does not have a pot to pee in they may be more dedicated than the person with top of the line gear. How do you know? Reading music can also be linked to socioeconomic status. Kind of "I went to private school and was forced to take 12 years of organized music lessons but I only want to be in your band to get chicks and look cool. Mommy and daddy bought me this Les Paul and Marshall stack for my birthday but I wanted a Corvette". I say judge the musician's dedication by their character, not their education or posessions.

TR I think there are alot of variations/levels of "professionals" and each has it's own requirements. If you are playing in a situation where there is a band leader, session player, orchestra I won't doubt reading is either expected or definitely a leg up on non-readers.

I can't imagine why anyone would be required to be able to read music in a local bar band playing covers or even if it were originals. I guess I can understand a little of what Notes and Crow are saying not sure if it's the reading skill that makes them easier to communicate with or is it that someone that has learned how to read fluently probably spent alot more serious time with music and just has much better understanding then most and it's not necessarily the fact that they read per se but that it's just a by-product of those who can.

Heck I doubt if you audtioned for a national rock and roll band you wouldn't be required either. It would never be a mark against anyone if they can read but I don't see that as an absolute requirement to have a skill that would never be needed.

That said I'm sure some people are going to ask for it and will want people with that skill even if they actually don't need it for the band.

Went in to a guitar shop to try the new Hagström Northern Series Super Swede today. It could be called an alternative to the Gibson Les Paul, but with some different specs. However, didn't like at all. The neck was weird and sticky and I don't know what the overdriven sound was meant to be, but to my ears it didn't sound any good at all.

So the salesman asked showed me other Les Paul guitars in the same price range (It's the same as the Les Paul Studio) and showed me a second-hand Edwards guitar and presented it with: "Well, there's this guitar if you don't mind the name on headstock"...

It is the best guitar I've ever played. It played SO much better than a Gibson Les Paul Studio I tried and the sound is amazing. And it's all the same woods as a Gibson, but much lighter (like a '50s Gibson Les Paul in other words).

So, I don't think the name matters, UNLESS you care about the second-hand value. Then there is a BIG difference if you buy a Gibson or an Epiphone.

So if I go pro one day, that's my opinion 8) . I think pro's care less about name on gear than amatuers. They are often in a situation where they have the opportunity to try a lot more gear than what an "ordinary" person could afford too.

Its probably because of Edwards and the other "Lawsuit" companies that we can even have this conversation. There was a time when you had professional models, student models and everything else was practically novelty items. The Japanese companies really gave affordable imports some credibility, then it seemed to swing again in the 90's when companies took advantage of that cred and the market was full of a ton of garbage. It's rare today that you see plywood and pot metal on guitars, lots of companies even shy away from ceramic pickups whereas that used to be a pretty good indicator of quality. I think entry level guitars are as good to day as some of the mid-level stuff from 15 years ago.

Wow.. quite a discussion going on here..

Well Im kinda a outsider here, never being in a band, and nowere near a pro skill level.. But from hanging with bands back in the day, and knowing a few people in ands over the years... I dont know if you can brake it down to "pro's" and not pros.. it seems to me its the band leaders atatude. There are a LOT of guys out there that are gear snobs and feel that if it doesnt have the name its crap. Granted... we are talking a step above the 100 buck ebay strat copy, and 15wt frontman amp phase... as aand leader you dont want the guitarplayer bowing out halfway through a gig becouse the neck snapped off!! :D But realy... you can get a lot out of good midline gear.

I guess a lot comes down to what level of "Pro" your talking about also.. A local known barband, or a top line world famous proformer putting together a tour would make a big diference.

you dont want the guitarplayer bowing out halfway through a gig becouse the neck snapped off!! :D But realy... you can get a lot out of good midline gear.

I had a gig a few years back where the rhythm guitarist had top of the line gear (Gibson guitars, full Marshall stack)... but no spare fuse to replace the one that blew in his amp. We were only able to finish the gig because I was prepared with spares to spare.

"Pro" is only about the equipment to the extent that it does what you want, and it gets the job done. A lot more of being a "pro" is being prepared for whatever happens, because eventually it will.

<...> but no spare fuse to replace the one that blew in his amp. We were only able to finish the gig because I was prepared with spares to spare.<...>

OUCH!

You have to be a "the show must go on" person in this business!

This is one of the best posts I've seen so far. Great topic. I firmly believe that trying a lot of guitars and amps helps you to distinguish between all of those subtle differences. Do all humbuckers sound the same?....nope. Do 10's sound different than 9's? Yep. I wouldn't say that I have a strong opinion, either way, of whether or not the dollars spent translates to quality, but I would highly encourage any budding musician to try a lot of different pieces of gear before shelling out the big bucks. As stated earlier in the post, the signal chain has a lot of parts and pieces.....strings, guitar, pedals, amp, equalization, etc, etc. It takes time to really know what you want......what suits you best as an individual guitar player.

Jake you have a great point.

I think each person has to try out a few different things before he/she finds out what is best for himself/herself.

My first electric was a used Gibson ES-330 that I picked up for $300. Light weight, full hollow body, P90 pickups, slim neck, separate vol/tone control for each pickup.

I got a job in an outdoor marina and didn't want the salt water inside the guitar so I tried a Kramer imitation Strat. I found that no mater how hard I tried, I couldn't get used to the short radius fretboard. The strings fretted out while bending and worse than that, the curvature of the strings by my picking hand slowed me down and decreased my accuracy and dynamics.

So I got an ESP/LTD Les Paul clone for almost nothing. I didn't like the humbucker tone, after playing P90s and the single coils, it just didn't have the clarity I was used to. So I modded it, put in 2 Mean 90s, rewired it for one vol, one tone and put a varitone in the hole where the second volume control used to be. I discovered a few things (1) having a master volume near my pinky finger is extremely convenient (2) the Varitone was OK, but not really worth it and (3) being that I switch instruments all night (sax, guitar, flute, wind synth, etc.) having an 8 pound guitar is a PITA

So I got a Parker DF and discovered (1) I love the ebony fretboard and stainless steel frets (2) I love Sperzel locking tuners (3) I prefer the longer scale and (4) light weight is the way to go. I'm very happy with the Parker and no longer have Gas.

I've done the same with pedals to a lesser extent.

If I would have spent the big bucks on a Gibson Les Paul instead of the LTD, I would have had a $1300 lesson on what is right for Jimmy Page but what isn't right for me. Same for a USA Fender Strat instead of the inexpensive Kramer would have been money spent to find out what I didn't like. Jeff Beck makes the Strat sing, but that short radius fretboard just isn't for me. Plus both guitars are too heavy for a quick instrument change dozens of times per night.

My first electric, the Gibson is still one of my favorites. But I've learned that without a master volume near my right pinky, I don't want to gig with it - and certainly don't want to play it outdoors near the salt water.

And that's my personal experience. YMMV.

There are plenty of decent guitars that are close enough for evaluation that are also good enough to gig with. Once you have sampled a few different guitar styles, you can decide what features you like and then make your decision as to how far up the ladder of diminishing returns you want to go. I opted for the lowest priced DF. I like the natural wood color and all the more money I would have spent would have gone only to a fancy wood cap and/or paint job.

Insights and incites by Notes